People who don't relate to this movie…
-
DnB614 — 12 years ago(February 19, 2014 09:53 PM)
And that's the point. If you don't have experience, you do NOT go out alone to get that experience. You go with someone who DOES have experience. You learn from them, and THEN you go out alone for a walkabout. And you always have 2-3 backup plans. Things can and do go wrong in the wilderness.
I do not think he deserved to die for his stupidity, but I think it is ridiculous that he is being glorified.
This is pretty much how I feel, though slightly less extreme. I do believe that Chris's rejection of societal norms is what polarizes people, and I think he had some interesting views on life. I also think he was young, naive, and selfish in many ways. He never contacted his parents, or his sister who he cared for deeply, to let them know he was okay. He was ill-equipped and unprepared for his "Alaskan Adventure" and it ultimately cost him his life. He was not a revolutionary or a hero in any sense of those words, but he was also not a spoiled brat or completely a-hole like some people make him out to be. He was an idealistic young person trying to find himself who went about it in some unconventional and sometimes selfish means. He made some bad decisions and ultimately died as a result of them. -
shonoffilm — 12 years ago(May 17, 2013 05:26 AM)
To the OP, those types of people have questioned life and wondered about other possibilities but they don't dwell on them. They can give reasonable justifications for the reasons why they do the things they do or don't do. They're for the most part content with their lives and feel there are no major things lacking so they don't seek more. Nothing is wrong with them, it's just who they are. This movie had a impact on me because of it's overall messages (there was more than one major message). I personally believe Chris thought he succeeded but he truly didn't. He only got to experience the lifestyle he yearned for but he never got to live it or become that person he wanted to be. Chris was flawed as a person and so were his ideals.
conquer the world with howiconquered -
icyharris-539-169904 — 12 years ago(June 23, 2013 06:29 AM)
I get the part of about the consumerism, the inequities in life, the pain and suffering you see that no one seems to be doing enough about. But I don't get cutting off yourself entirely from your loved ones, including the ones he met along the way. Even those who lived off the land that he met didn't live in isolation, but lived in loving communities that they created themselves. We were not created to live alone. Even monks and nuns who choose to leave their old life behind go to a community of like minded people.
Beyonce has a song, "I was here" that is such an antithesis to all that she's marketed herself to be up to this point. It basically talks about leaving an impact on the world after you die. I have to believe that by his leaving a journal and other documentation around that he wanted his life's journey not to be in vain and to cause people to think about their decisions and beliefs. -
zwolf — 12 years ago(August 27, 2013 06:58 AM)
I'd liken him more to revolutionary thinkers like Descartes and Locke if he had actually
achieved
anything, or had any kind of point to make. McCandless didn't. He didn't accomplish anything, and he didn't even try to he just ran away from being a person and instead tried to be a storybook hero he invented. He couldn't be Christopher McCandless, so he tried to become "Alexander Supertramp." That person didn't exist, and so, eventually, neither did Christopher.
Descartes and Locke were great thinkers. Chris was not. I get it that a lot of people like the idea of going and living in the woods but there's nothing admirable about Chris. This isn't a Walden story. Thoreau (although overrated), planned things out and didn't go to the ass-end of nowhere and try to be something he wasn't.
Romanticizing this guy and making excuses for him blurs the whole point of his story: he's dead, he died horribly, and his unrealistic dreams and ideals are what killed him. -
SALTER-pt — 12 years ago(August 28, 2013 02:33 AM)
I'd liken him more to revolutionary thinkers like Descartes and Locke if he had actually achieved anything, or had any kind of point to make. McCandless didn't. He didn't accomplish anything, and he didn't even try to [] Descartes and Locke were great thinkers. Chris was not
Exactly. Very strange comparison.
Just die you cowardly filth - jag001 -
AtheistRevolution — 12 years ago(November 15, 2013 06:33 AM)
No he was just a moron. People stuck in Antarctica have performed their own self-surgery.He went out and didn't know crap about the land but wanted to act like he was an Eskimo or something.At least do your research and talk with hunters around that area. I've traveled around the world but I usually want to find someone with experience in that region.
- Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
-
tppettit — 12 years ago(February 19, 2014 02:58 PM)
Slow the beep down there. He was a recycler of philosophy not one himself. That's not to say that people that don't consider the philosophy of things have their beep figured out. They just listen to Pavement, smirk and let the sh*t roll of their backs.
-
xxx131000 — 12 years ago(February 23, 2014 05:19 AM)
I think at some point in their life most people are trying to figure out life, they try to search for the purpose and meaning of their life, but some people don't dwell on it and try to make the best of what life's offered to them and some others keep thinking about it to the point that it's bugging them and make them take an "extreme" path like what Chris did or becoming monk, etc. It's good movie I can understand his sentiment but he shouldn't have shunned his family like that.
-
KennethWasHere — 11 years ago(October 02, 2014 02:02 PM)
but he seems like one of those philosophical thinkers that start revolutions (i.e. Descartes, Locke etc)
No. Just no. This kid was a spoiled, narcissistic, inconsiderate twat with an unwarranted superiority complex, just like everyone who thinks like him. It's feasible to find ones own way through the world without being an ignorant, self-righteous little beep who has the gall to look down on anyone who doesn't run off into the woods and put their family through emotional turmoil.
The bitter thinkers buy their tickets to go find God like a piggy in a fair -
sbhblore — 11 years ago(October 14, 2014 04:10 AM)
The QUESTIONS Chris asked are genuine and real. About Existence and Happiness. And he set out to find those answers but died in that process. It is very unfair to brand him as Stupid or whatever. THAT he desired for those answers shows that he was Intelligent and more importantly wise enough to crave for those answers.
Branding him as Stupid shows shallowness of thought.
The entire mass of humanity is content with the situation and get their happiness from Money, power, wealth, entertainment (TV), Music, Sports, Politics and what not. They are SATISFIED in that mode of life. But that happiness is fleeting and will pass away when its over.
It would take a sufferor (as in the case of Chris who suffered from his parents) to question and find out the meaning of life..Someone who has had a loving family and friends or who has had an easy life would never care for these questions.
And once you suffer and start asking these questions, then you automatically rebel against Parents, Society, Religion etc..Why do you rebel?Because these things (Parents, society, religion) have no answers to these questions. Because all these are part of the same game I mentioned (living a lie ).
It truly takes Wisdom to ask these questions. And then it takes Bravery to seek out answers to these questions and Chris was Brave. But that he failed in it was not his fault. -
sbhblore — 11 years ago(October 23, 2014 11:16 PM)
why does there have to be someone's fault?. Why cannot something happen where noone is in fault?.
BTW if you really want to know if someone is AT FAULT - I would say his parents were at fault in the first place. If they had given their son LOVE instead of monetary luxuries and their superficial and fake concern probably the kid would have not taught of the things he did think. -
mikeywilldunk — 11 years ago(December 10, 2014 06:51 PM)
sbhblore and OP put it very well. I just wanted to say I agree, and that I feel the same as OP. It's really a mind state that some don't get to experience. That existential "suffering" mind state. If you haven't been forced into a craphole where things are disillusioning and pointless, then you are living an ok life.
It's human nature to confirm events agreeing with our lifestyle, and reject things not in line with our actions, and that's what the haters are doing - snap-judging and dismissing Chris as "foolish" or whatnot.
We don't want any event (of death) to inject doubts into our daily justifications to stay alive, and to get up in the morning. It's too risky. Unless we are already in that state of doubt. In which case, we are capable of empathizing with Chris. We understand how disillusioned he felt, and how impossible it was to seek happiness conventionally, without going through his journey first.
My take is that he was consciously or subconsciously prepared to lose his life on this trip because he would be less miserable dying free from society compared to living in society.
I mean, why do people commit suicide? Life becomes too unbearably miserable to continue. So get out. It's the same thing, except Chris was motivated enough to at least try an alternate lifestyle first. -
Hemiola_78 — 11 years ago(December 20, 2014 12:45 PM)
To the OP: Oh please, enough of the "aren't you tired of your miserable dull life you easily satisfied fat pig" discourse.
Maybe if I were still 17 (and a little misguided) I would take this movie for something else, but at my age I see it for what it really is: a lame attempt to glorify and romanticize the fate of a guy who didn't really know what to do with his life after graduation, and ended up committing suicide, slowly.
This is not to say that the movie doesn't have its merits. But at the end of the day no amount of quotes from classics, beautiful landscapes, hippie caravans and 16 years old Joni Mitchells who want to sleep with you on the road can change the story.
You have to be joking when comparing this guy to a revolutionary. What did he exactly revolutionize? At best, he's the Che Guevara who didn't survive his motorcycle trips, who never found his communist utopia, but expired in a sleeping bag in a rusty bus in the middle of nowhere. Not even the victim of enemy bullets, but of his own ignorance, carelessness and possibly mental illness (yes, he showed signs of paranoia). -
everydayboredom1980 — 11 years ago(January 05, 2015 10:03 AM)
"Revolutionary" lol
A revolution of pretentious idiots on the internet who always yap about a bunch of crap and make assumptions about others. So frequently when you read about this story, there's people saying stuff like "oh he lived so much more full, such a happier life than all of you"..How the hell does anyone know what kind of life some random person has from an internet comment?
A lot of people, hell most people probably haven't "figured out life", everyone has problems, but people react differently to their troubles.
It's a rather sad story to methere were loved ones of his who didn't know what happened to him. That's obviously horrible to go thru. And his death, likely from starving to death rather than the theories put forth by Kraukner and Penn.that's a terrible way to go. His SOS notes at the end of his life state that he was weak and obviously was in distress. He weighed less than 70 lbs and died of starvation, so it's pretty clear he suffered, as anyone going thru that would.
It seems like a lot of people hate the guy, but I think it's more just not liking how he's been glorified and how Kraukner and Penn romanticized the whole story and how people react to it. I don't know why people after all these years would stil so strongly hate the person so much, he died a long time ago and suffered enough, it's not like he was some mass killer or serial rapist or something. He already paid the ultimate price for his mistakes.
If he had a mental illness, which is a theory brought forth quite a bit, then it's still a sad story. A young person doesn't get the help he needs and dies a painful death in the wilderness. If he really was content with his life and died satisfied, it's still a sad story for his sister and other loved ones. -
Hemiola_78 — 11 years ago(January 07, 2015 12:05 PM)
I don't think it's a question of hate.
There's a difference between hating somebody and saying "I just don't see why he's a role model, hero, revolutionary, etc".
By the same token, there's a difference between saying that his death was a consequence of his actions, and implying that he deserved to die the way he did.
I think people are irritated because it's simply too much: a book, several articles in prominent journals, endless media coverage at the time, a website, at least 3 documentaries, and more recently a feature film. Sure American society must have something more substantial to focus on.
Last thing we need is a reason for like minded young people to say: if I do the same, maybe they'll do a movie about me one day too. -
everydayboredom1980 — 11 years ago(February 07, 2015 10:31 AM)
Yeah, that is true. People have actually tried to imitate his Alaskan journey into the wild and died as well.
I get why some people relate to being disillusioned with consumerism and respect how he just decided to do something "against the grain", but so many of the things people say to romanticize him is just ridiculous. A "revolutionary", a "great thinker"?? What from his writings could you garner to compare him to great revolutionaries and deep philosophers? Or how he supposedly "lived more full lives than all of us".
Mccandles going out and doing such a risky thing and dying while in search of a deeper meaning in life doesn't make his life any more full than those who don't feel the need to do something so drastic, or those whose adventures are more safe, and less selfish.